Dangers of helmet mounted cameras
Thread Starter
Dangers of helmet mounted cameras
Gopros and other small cameras are regularly used in tv productions of helicopter operations.
Some good news that the Schumacher is beginning to make a recovery.
Whats the connection?
Something I alluded to when we learnt he was wearing a camera at the time of his accident, was if it affected the performance of the helmet.
This comment from Schumacher's son today,
'The problem for Michael was not the hit, but the mounting of the Go-Pro camera that he had on his helmet that injured his brain,' said Moncet.
There may be a adverse reaction from TV company insurers regarding uncertified adaptions to safety equipment.
Imagine the furore and legal action if he was asked to wear the camera by a production company.
It would be usefull for aviation helmet manufacturers to chime in, does a stick-on mount adversley affect performance? Clips for NV kit are presumably designed to not affect performance in an impact, but a stick-on mount?
Would be sensible for helmets to have specific points where cameras can be safely temorarily mounted using adhesive mounts.
Mickjoebill
Some good news that the Schumacher is beginning to make a recovery.
Whats the connection?
Something I alluded to when we learnt he was wearing a camera at the time of his accident, was if it affected the performance of the helmet.
This comment from Schumacher's son today,
'The problem for Michael was not the hit, but the mounting of the Go-Pro camera that he had on his helmet that injured his brain,' said Moncet.
There may be a adverse reaction from TV company insurers regarding uncertified adaptions to safety equipment.
Imagine the furore and legal action if he was asked to wear the camera by a production company.
It would be usefull for aviation helmet manufacturers to chime in, does a stick-on mount adversley affect performance? Clips for NV kit are presumably designed to not affect performance in an impact, but a stick-on mount?
Would be sensible for helmets to have specific points where cameras can be safely temorarily mounted using adhesive mounts.
Mickjoebill
There are regs covering this. NVG fittings. Pull weight of disconnecting cables on emergency egress. About 8lbs from memory. Similarly, the weight of cables to/from the helmet causing neck strain and headaches. Schumacher of all people would have been aware of this hazard. It is said he was just as good as the engineers who designed his cars. In fact, FI go further than aviation regs. It's a serious subject but one cannot legislate for a cavalier attitude or just simply switching off while away from the track.
Self-engineered camera mounts
The problem for Michael was not the hit, but the mounting of the Go-Pro camera that he had on his helmet that injured his brain,' said Moncet.
...
Would be sensible for helmets to have specific points where cameras can be safely temorarily mounted using adhesive mounts.
...
Would be sensible for helmets to have specific points where cameras can be safely temorarily mounted using adhesive mounts.
I do a bit of skiing and I am terrified of getting a go-pro in the face or the back of the head. I would ban helmet mounted protrusions of all kinds from lift accessible ski areas. I am able to ignore the risk and get on with it but it is not a pleasant thought when it does come my way.
I could never use one myself since I am not sufficiently selfish.
OMG the health and safety wombles are out now ! Is this all we have to talk about ? there is a risk in everything we do, I think the risk of wearing a go pro is minimal, question to you all then if Schumacher had not ben wearing a helmet what would have happened irrespective of a go pro?
Bit like the issue of tin hats in WW1 increased the casualty rate by nearly 30 % swamping the British medical system !
Are we going to make wearing helmets gloves nomex flying suits compulsory ? We will be banning single engine helicopters next
Bit like the issue of tin hats in WW1 increased the casualty rate by nearly 30 % swamping the British medical system !
Are we going to make wearing helmets gloves nomex flying suits compulsory ? We will be banning single engine helicopters next
Unfortunately, mjb is most likely aware that the H+S brigade are alive and breeding in Victoria; last year a motorcyclist was booked for having a GoPro camera on his motorcycle helmet on the basis that it contravened the Australian Standards approval. The same Victoria Police station has had an attack of the vapours a few months ago and booked another rider, who is disputing the offence and awaiting a court date since it needs a proper legal interpretation by the court system rather than a copper's interpretation of the regulations.
The revelation (known on social media for some time) that Schu's injury was caused by a camera mount will add to the cries of doom and gloom from those who neither know, nor want to know, that the certification criteria for a flying helmet and a motorcycle helmet are significantly higher than for a ski helmet and the resistance to penetration by a stuck on camera mount is infinitesimally less.
The revelation (known on social media for some time) that Schu's injury was caused by a camera mount will add to the cries of doom and gloom from those who neither know, nor want to know, that the certification criteria for a flying helmet and a motorcycle helmet are significantly higher than for a ski helmet and the resistance to penetration by a stuck on camera mount is infinitesimally less.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Inacave
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non-pilot here again but with some knowledge in this matter. Most helmet manufacturers prohibit any kind of addition or alteration to their products, with none that I know of allowing anything like a camera mount. They have done the design and testing- they are the experts in the matter- so I'd trust their judgment regardless if some other authority permitted such things. Your helmet is your final line of defense when things go wrong- why chance weakening that line?
SawMan, I'd be interested in any specific references you can give to such an assertion relating to motorcycle helmets in particular. We (motorcycling advocates in Australia) are completely unable to get any comment from manufacturers either for or against stuck on camera mounts. They use (as in Schu's case on his ski helmet) double sided tape, with no penetration of nor modification to the helmet shell save for the adhesive.
Whereas CEP plugs require a hole to be drilled into the flying helmet shell, Bluetooth installations often require a hole into the motorcycle helmet shell or the edge of the shell and compliance stickers are attached with an adhesive. Certainly the bluetooth modification and the compliance sticker are with the approval of the helmet manufacturer (in my case, BMW).
Whereas CEP plugs require a hole to be drilled into the flying helmet shell, Bluetooth installations often require a hole into the motorcycle helmet shell or the edge of the shell and compliance stickers are attached with an adhesive. Certainly the bluetooth modification and the compliance sticker are with the approval of the helmet manufacturer (in my case, BMW).
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you have to test for three things:
1. The glue from the sticker weakening the shell;
2. An increase in slip-resistance (the mount might increase the risk of the helmet rotating your head if it catches on something as you slide along); and
3. An increase in the risk of penetration by whatever is stuck to the helmet (go-pro mount) because the glue keeps the thing at 90 degrees to your helmet ready to be pushed-through on impact.....
3M did respond to requests for information from the ASTM (cycle helmets) in relation to their reflective tape. This obviously only related to the potential for adhesive to affect the shell strength. They said
1. The glue from the sticker weakening the shell;
2. An increase in slip-resistance (the mount might increase the risk of the helmet rotating your head if it catches on something as you slide along); and
3. An increase in the risk of penetration by whatever is stuck to the helmet (go-pro mount) because the glue keeps the thing at 90 degrees to your helmet ready to be pushed-through on impact.....
3M did respond to requests for information from the ASTM (cycle helmets) in relation to their reflective tape. This obviously only related to the potential for adhesive to affect the shell strength. They said
"...many adhesives are available throughout the industry and it would be impossible to tell what the effect would be without testing the tape or sticker product on the respective helmet materials.... although we believe the 3M PSA retro reflective tape adhesives would not affect the helmet shells, because of the small amount of residual monomers in the adhesive, the use of all tapes/stickers should be tested to insure compatibility with helmet shells."
I understand that sticking mounts to your helmet is banned in (for example) Paris Dakar for safety reasons (item 2 and 3 above).
Last edited by John R81; 14th Oct 2014 at 08:14.
Thread Starter
I think the risk of wearing a go pro is minimal, question to you all then if Schumacher had not ben wearing a helmet what would have happened irrespective of a go pro?
I worked on the first ever TV program where body cameras were worn for a documentary series. They were in chest pockets with a tape recorder worn in a bum bag. That was 20 years ago!
But I haven't heard of an injury from body/helmet cameras apart from some conjecture regarding Richard Hammonds jet car crash where the accident report mentions his helmet could have been damaged by the clamp on the roll bar.
However! go pros are everywhere, maybe 7 million being sold since 2012?
One must be prudent if attaching (modifying?) anything to a helmet so as to still be insured if something does go pear shaped.
No question they are great tools for telling the story of emergency services.
All I'm saying' is make sure you are still insured when wearing one
and don't expect much advice from the industry."We’re a camera company first,” says Sony product manager Greg Herd. “GoPro is a mount company first that sourced to cameras.”
Here is the owner of Go Pro with a brace of go pros, I doubt if he has ever worried about what insurers think
"Over the past three years, the skydiving website Dropzone.com has documented at least 22 accidents, two of them fatal, attributable to the interference of a wearable camera with an essential piece of safety equipment."
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor...Accidents.html
Mickjoebill
Last edited by mickjoebill; 14th Oct 2014 at 06:24.
In a previous life (well, it seems like it) I used to service and issue night vision goggles (NVGs) to aircrew. The helicopter ones (goggles, not aircrew
) had sprung balls to retain them on the mount, whilst the fast jet type, which were expected to see higher forces in low level flight, had a cartridge which, as part of the ejection sequence would separate the goggle from the helmet before the seat fired, to prevent a broken neck.
In the case of the helicopter NVGs, the separation force was precise and calibrated regularly with specialist test equipment. On the fast jet ones, I would run a continuity and power test on the firing circuit every time before issuing them to the pilots.
How many Go Pro users know the force at which the velcro or double sided tape will separate if they get a blow on the camera or mount? Would you be prepared to stick a block on your helmet with either material, put it on, and have a mate knock the block off by swinging a length of 4" x 2" at it?
In Schumacher's case, if it was snow that stopped the camera, the load may have been pretty evenly spread, thus allowing the camera housing and mount to take and transmit a lot of force before breaking.
On clean, smooth surfaces, double sided tape can transmit a very large force before the foam fails. If the surfaces were free of contamination when the tape was applied, the adhesive is very unlikely to peel off quickly.
Sticking anything on a helmet is adding a lever, or at least a means of gripping a surface, which might easily provide enough force to break your neck or shake your brain around in ways it wasn't designed for.
) had sprung balls to retain them on the mount, whilst the fast jet type, which were expected to see higher forces in low level flight, had a cartridge which, as part of the ejection sequence would separate the goggle from the helmet before the seat fired, to prevent a broken neck.In the case of the helicopter NVGs, the separation force was precise and calibrated regularly with specialist test equipment. On the fast jet ones, I would run a continuity and power test on the firing circuit every time before issuing them to the pilots.
How many Go Pro users know the force at which the velcro or double sided tape will separate if they get a blow on the camera or mount? Would you be prepared to stick a block on your helmet with either material, put it on, and have a mate knock the block off by swinging a length of 4" x 2" at it?
In Schumacher's case, if it was snow that stopped the camera, the load may have been pretty evenly spread, thus allowing the camera housing and mount to take and transmit a lot of force before breaking.
On clean, smooth surfaces, double sided tape can transmit a very large force before the foam fails. If the surfaces were free of contamination when the tape was applied, the adhesive is very unlikely to peel off quickly.
Sticking anything on a helmet is adding a lever, or at least a means of gripping a surface, which might easily provide enough force to break your neck or shake your brain around in ways it wasn't designed for.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Midlands
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mechta,
Absolutely right about double-sided tape. I've had to remove items fixed with this and it isn't easy. A slow peel seemed to work best, with a sudden pull (or impact) its effectively a solid connection.
Absolutely right about double-sided tape. I've had to remove items fixed with this and it isn't easy. A slow peel seemed to work best, with a sudden pull (or impact) its effectively a solid connection.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take a glass of water and float something on the surface of the water. Turn the glass slowly and the object will turn with the glass. Now try turning the glass sharply and see how the object fails to turn with the glass.
Your brain (the object) and skull (the glass) behave in the same way. Hence the significant brain damage from high-torque rotation of a helmet with your skull strapped to it whilst your brain is not.
Myself, I stuck the camara mount on the bike fairing, not my helmet
Your brain (the object) and skull (the glass) behave in the same way. Hence the significant brain damage from high-torque rotation of a helmet with your skull strapped to it whilst your brain is not.
Myself, I stuck the camara mount on the bike fairing, not my helmet
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Midlands
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the other possibility, already mentioned, with the same result: a mounted camera hits something, stops head and helmet rotating but the brain continues to move inside the skull.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: N/A
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
motorcycle or helicopter?
I'm a bit surprised that a lot of people consider the risks of motorcycle riding/skiing the same as the ones involved in helicopter flying (not to talk about the guy mentioning ejecting off a fast jet).
Should you crash your helicopter, your head/helmet isn't really gonna be sliding long distance over the pavement or other surfaces getting caught in obstacles and what not (if it is then I believe it was the end of the line anyway). The idea is that your seatbelt keeps you inside the cockpit, isn't it?
And if a "90º force pushes your camera through the helmet" (without it breaking off first), I would also think you were not meant to make it.
I guess the only difference would really be the weight and the angular momentum created by the camera, which most likely would ruin your neck.
Regarding stickers, 3M double tape, and yadiyadiyadas: maybe it does affect the "structural integrity" of your helmet but having had to use my (sticker decorated) motorcycle helmet I can tell you the effects are negligible probably inexistent. If your helmet breaks apart from the forces involved, I would think it's likely your neck (or other body parts) won't handle the trauma.
Should you crash your helicopter, your head/helmet isn't really gonna be sliding long distance over the pavement or other surfaces getting caught in obstacles and what not (if it is then I believe it was the end of the line anyway). The idea is that your seatbelt keeps you inside the cockpit, isn't it?
And if a "90º force pushes your camera through the helmet" (without it breaking off first), I would also think you were not meant to make it.
I guess the only difference would really be the weight and the angular momentum created by the camera, which most likely would ruin your neck.
Regarding stickers, 3M double tape, and yadiyadiyadas: maybe it does affect the "structural integrity" of your helmet but having had to use my (sticker decorated) motorcycle helmet I can tell you the effects are negligible probably inexistent. If your helmet breaks apart from the forces involved, I would think it's likely your neck (or other body parts) won't handle the trauma.
It hit the runway inverted and slid for 1,200 feet with the flight test observers bonedome rubbing on the asphalt. His bonedome was so worn away as a result that there was only the inner fabric between his head and the runway left!
